- From: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
- Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2008 00:52:49 +0100
- To: Kartikaya Gupta <lists.webapps@stakface.com>
- CC: public-webapps@w3.org
Kartikaya Gupta wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 16:06:23 +0100, "Charles McCathieNevile"
> <chaals@opera.com> wrote:
>> [1] http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/selectors-api/ [2]
>
> Is it just me or is the "scope element" somewhat under-defined in the
> spec? The only mentions of it are in this sentence:
>
> "If the context node is a Document node, then the scope element is
> the documentElement of the given document. If the context node is an
> Element node, then the scope element is the same as the context
> node."
>
> However, it doesn't say what the scope element does or why it's
> relevant, nor does it have a reference to any other spec that
> explains this. I did a quick search through the list archives (I
> haven't been following it too closely) and it looks like the :scope
> pseudo-class will be defined in another spec.
It was added with the intention of referencing whichever spec :scope (or
whatever it gets called) gets defined in, which will most likely be
Selectors Level 4. The statement itself makes sense when read in the
context of the :scope proposal.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2008Jul/att-0025/Overview.html
But I suppose I could comment it out for now, until :scope is defined in
a real spec and the statement is actually needed.
> Also, since the scope element stuff was deferred to another spec,
> this spec remains somewhat ambiguous (at least to me) about exactly
> what gets selected in the following case:
>
> <html>
> <body>
> <div class="bar">
> <div id="foo">
> <div class="baz"></div>
> </div>
> </div>
> </body>
> </html>
>
> document.getElementById('foo').querySelector('.bar .baz')
This is covered in the spec by the statement:
"Selectors are evaluated against a given element in the context the
entire DOM tree in which the element is located."
> I believe the above querySelector call should return the "baz" div as
> opposed to NULL, but it took me a few close readings of the spec to
> decide on that. A clarifying example in the spec would be quite
> helpful on this one.
Yeah, I suppose it's not too late to add a small example illustrating that.
I've made those changes in the current editor's draft. Though I'd
rather not make too many additional changes now as I don't want to hold
up publication. Any other issues like this can wait till after this
Last Call draft is published and can be fixed before it goes to CR.
--
Lachlan Hunt - Opera Software
http://lachy.id.au/
http://www.opera.com/
Received on Friday, 31 October 2008 23:53:36 UTC